Literature DB >> 28289936

Comparison of spin-echo echoplanar imaging and gradient recalled echo-based MR elastography at 3 Tesla with and without gadoxetic acid administration.

Yong Seek Kim1, Ji Soo Song2,3,4, Stephan Kannengiesser5, Seung Young Seo6,7,8.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare spin-echo echoplanar imaging (SE-EPI) and gradient recalled echo (GRE) MR elastography (MRE) at 3 T with and without gadoxetic acid administration.
METHODS: We included 84 patients who underwent MRE before and after gadoxetic acid administration, each time using SE-EPI and GRE sequences. Diagnostic performance for predicting clinical liver cirrhosis and high-risk oesophageal varices was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC). The relationships between T2* and success of MRE, and correlations of liver stiffness (LS) values between the two sequences or before and after gadoxetic acid administration, were investigated.
RESULTS: SE-EPI-MRE resulted in a significantly lower failure rate than GRE-MRE (1.19% vs. 10.71%, P = 0.018). Increased T2* was related to higher probability of successful LS measurement (odds ratio, 1.426; P = 0.004). The AUC of SE-EPI-MRE was comparable to that of GRE-MRE for the detection of clinical liver cirrhosis (0.938 vs. 0.948, P = 0.235) and high-risk oesophageal varices (0.839 vs. 0.752, P = 0.354). LS values were not significantly different before and after gadoxetic acid administration.
CONCLUSION: SE-EPI-MRE can substitute for GRE-MRE for the detection of clinical liver cirrhosis and high-risk oesophageal varices. SE-EPI-MRE is particularly useful in patients with iron deposition, with lower failure rates than GRE-MRE. KEY POINTS: • LS values are comparable between SE-EPI-MRE and GRE-MRE. • Administration of gadoxetic acid does not influence LS measurement. • The failure rate of SE-EPI-MRE is significantly lower than that of GRE-MRE.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gadoxetic acid; Gradient recalled echo; Liver fibrosis; Magnetic resonance elastography; Spin echo

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28289936     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-4781-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  30 in total

1.  Effects of gadoxetic acid on liver elasticity measurement by using magnetic resonance elastography.

Authors:  Utaroh Motosugi; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Hironobu Sou; Katsuhiro Sano; Ali Muhi; Richard L Ehman; Tsutomu Araki
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Comparison of interobserver agreement of magnetic resonance elastography with histopathological staging of liver fibrosis.

Authors:  Jurgen H Runge; Anneloes E Bohte; Joanne Verheij; Valeska Terpstra; Aart J Nederveen; Karin M J van Nieuwkerk; Rob J de Knegt; Bert C Baak; Peter L M Jansen; Ralph Sinkus; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2014-04

3.  Usefulness of MR elastography for detecting clinical progression of cirrhosis from child-pugh class A to B in patients with type C viral hepatitis.

Authors:  Tomohiro Takamura; Utaroh Motosugi; Shintaro Ichikawa; Katsuhiro Sano; Hiroyuki Morisaka; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Nobuyuki Enomoto; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-02-29       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Interplatform reproducibility of liver and spleen stiffness measured with MR elastography.

Authors:  Temel Kaya Yasar; Mathilde Wagner; Octavia Bane; Cecilia Besa; James S Babb; Stephan Kannengiesser; Maggie Fung; Richard L Ehman; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: influence of intravenous gadolinium administration on measured liver stiffness.

Authors:  James Thomas Patrick Decourcy Hallinan; Hind Saif Alsaif; Aileen Wee; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-04

6.  Hepatic MR Elastography: Clinical Performance in a Series of 1377 Consecutive Examinations.

Authors:  Meng Yin; Kevin J Glaser; Jayant A Talwalkar; Jun Chen; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Three-Tesla magnetic resonance elastography for hepatic fibrosis: comparison with diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Hee Sun Park; Young Jun Kim; Mi Hye Yu; Won Hyeok Choe; Sung Il Jung; Hae Jeong Jeon
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Combined Use of MR Fat Quantification and MR Elastography in Living Liver Donors: Can It Reduce the Need for Preoperative Liver Biopsy?

Authors:  Jeong Hee Yoon; Jeong Min Lee; Kyung-Suk Suh; Kwan-Woong Lee; Nam-Joon Yi; Kyung Bun Lee; Joon Koo Han; Byung Ihn Choi
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  MR elastography of liver fibrosis: preliminary results comparing spin-echo and echo-planar imaging.

Authors:  Laurent Huwart; Najat Salameh; Leon ter Beek; Eric Vicaut; Frank Peeters; Ralph Sinkus; Bernard E Van Beers
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Liver Fibrosis Staging with MR Elastography: Comparison of Diagnostic Performance between Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B and Those with Other Etiologic Causes.

Authors:  Won Chang; Jeong Min Lee; Jeong Hee Yoon; Joon Koo Han; Byung Ihn Choi; Jung Hwan Yoon; Kyoung Bun Lee; Kwang-Woong Lee; Nam-Joon Yi; Kyung-Suk Suh
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Magnetic resonance elastography: basic principles, technique, and clinical applications in the liver.

Authors:  Habip Eser Akkaya; Ayşe Erden; Diğdem Kuru Öz; Sena Ünal; İlhan Erden
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 2.  Comparison of gradient-recalled echo and spin-echo echo-planar imaging MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yong Seek Kim; Yu Na Jang; Ji Soo Song
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Feasibility and agreement of stiffness measurements using gradient-echo and spin-echo MR elastography sequences in unselected patients undergoing liver MRI.

Authors:  Guilherme Moura Cunha; Kevin J Glaser; Anke Bergman; Rodrigo P Luz; Eduardo H de Figueiredo; Flavia Paiva Proença Lobo Lopes
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Technical success rates and reliability of spin-echo echo-planar imaging (SE-EPI) MR elastography in patients with chronic liver disease or liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  Sang Lim Choi; Eun Sun Lee; Ara Ko; Hyun Jeong Park; Sung Bin Park; Byung Ihn Choi; Young Youn Cho; Stephan Kannengiesser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  MR elastography of liver at 3 Tesla: comparison of gradient-recalled echo (GRE) and spin-echo (SE) echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequences and agreement across stiffness measurements.

Authors:  Chenyang Zhan; Stephan Kannengiesser; Hersh Chandarana; Matthias Fenchel; Justin Ream; Krishna Prasad Shanbhogue
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2019-05

Review 6.  Liver fibrosis imaging: A clinical review of ultrasound and magnetic resonance elastography.

Authors:  Yingzhen N Zhang; Kathryn J Fowler; Arinc Ozturk; Chetan K Potu; Ashley L Louie; Vivian Montes; Walter C Henderson; Kang Wang; Michael P Andre; Anthony E Samir; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 7.  Elastography-based screening for esophageal varices in patients with advanced chronic liver disease.

Authors:  Rafael Paternostro; Thomas Reiberger; Theresa Bucsics
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.